do you agree with this? (1 Viewer)

[Villains]

once again i've been doing a philosophy/history deep dive lmao

On March 31st, 1776, Abigail Adams sent a letter to her husband, John Adams, titled "Remember the Ladies. During the American Revolution, women did not have a strong role in politics, therefore Abigail wrote this letter for her husband, asking him to remember the ladies.

In the letter, she said --
"That your sex are naturally tyrannical is a truth so thoroughly established..." (she was speaking of men)

so do you agree with what she said?

 

[litc]

once again i've been doing a philosophy/history deep dive lmao

On March 31st, 1776, Abigail Adams sent a letter to her husband, John Adams, titled "Remember the Ladies. During the American Revolution, women did not have a strong role in politics, therefore Abigail wrote this letter for her husband, asking him to remember the ladies.

In the letter, she said --
"That your sex are naturally tyrannical is a truth so thoroughly established..." (she was speaking of men)

so do you agree with what she said?

Men are not naturally tyrannical, no

But there is also human nature, and it's not exactly peace and love (but this is not only men)

And then there's also the biology of testosterone and aggression

And natural instinct to crave control and put others down to feel powerful (again not only men)

Very "Lord of the Flies" which is about pre-pubescent boys as young as 6, so testerone and aggression is not at puberty and after levels, and not really relating to "men" but actual children

Would 6 - 12 year old girls have behaved the same way? Idk. But be sadistic, crave power, maybe

So the statement like most stereotypes is part based on experience and/or fact and part bigotry and generalization

So disagree

 

[Villains]

Men are not naturally tyrannical, no

But there is also human nature, and it's not exactly peace and love (but this is not only men)

And then there's also the biology of testosterone and aggression

And natural instinct to crave control and put others down to feel powerful (again not only men)

Very "Lord of the Flies" which is about pre-pubescent boys as young as 6, so testerone and aggression is not at puberty and after levels, and not really relating to "men" but actual children

Would 6 - 12 year old girls have behaved the same way? Idk. But be sadistic, crave power, maybe

So the statement like most stereotypes is part based on experience and/or fact and part bigotry and generalization

So disagree

and during that era, men were just naturally taught and brought up that way. women had barely any role in social and political situations so it could also just be a thing of that time where men just thought they were superior by having more power. most people would seem to act that way if they had more power over someone.

 

[litc]

and during that era, men were just naturally taught and brought up that way. women had barely any role in social and political situations so it could also just be a thing of that time where men just thought they were superior by having more power. most people would seem to act that way if they had more power over someone.

yes, there is societal and cultural norms/expectations that definitely influence their behavior as well

If people are taught "wrong" as "right" how will they know? Trust their gut? But isn't going by instinct and nature alone a lot of the time behaving like a jerk?

So yeah for sure

 

[Villains]

yes, there is societal and cultural norms/expectations that definitely influence their behavior as well

If people are taught "wrong" as "right" how will they know? Trust their gut? But isn't going by instinct and nature alone a lot of the time behaving like a jerk?

So yeah for sure

plus, there were many men during that time who stood up for women, wrote many books for their cause.

 

[litc]

plus, there were many men during that time who stood up for women, wrote many books for their cause.

Yes, tyranny I think is a more human nature thing then men thing, but men had more power and women were more oppressed, which also put them in them a position to develop more empathy (at that time)

But the men who did were veryyyyy few compared to the masses

 

[Villains]

Yes, tyranny I think is a more human nature thing then men thing, but men have more power and women were more oppressed, which also put them in them a position to develop more empathy

But the men who did were veryyyyy few

yeah, if you look at other instances where women were in power, it wasn't any different from having a male leader. (like Bloody Mary, Maria Theresa, etc) and i can only name one or two men off the top of my head that were supportive of women having equal rights as men

 

[litc]

yeah, if you look at other instances where women were in power, it wasn't any different from having a male leader. (like Bloody Mary, Maria Theresa, etc) and i can only name one or two men off the top of my head that were supportive of women having equal rights as men

Yes, exactly

 

[dummi]

men on average have a lower emotional IQ + higher aggression and tendency to commit violent crimes more often than women. with that being said, tyranny in this sense was meant as "your sex has the tendency to be cruel" which I agree with her on

 

[StirFriedPanda]

once again i've been doing a philosophy/history deep dive lmao

On March 31st, 1776, Abigail Adams sent a letter to her husband, John Adams, titled "Remember the Ladies. During the American Revolution, women did not have a strong role in politics, therefore Abigail wrote this letter for her husband, asking him to remember the ladies.

In the letter, she said --
"That your sex are naturally tyrannical is a truth so thoroughly established..." (she was speaking of men)

so do you agree with what she said?

Yes, Men do all the worst shit because if we left it to women the world would already be a radioactive glass parking lot. And the war would have been over shoes.

 

[litc]

As for tyranny, I agree with Plato - the best leaders are those who don't want to be a leader but are forced into the position

Those who willingly want to be a leader always run the risk of becoming corrupt no matter how "good" and "pure" they were before. And naturally become arrogant, think they know what's best, and may become tyrannical doing what's "best"

The only problem is, leaders who are put into their position not because they wanted the power may resent their subjects, and abuse them and their power bc - "I don't want this position", see their responsibility and subjects as a "burden" and also the "if I have to suffer, you will too" mindset, rather than "bc I suffered I will make sure no one else will in the same way" mindset

This is similar to TW for child abuse so I'll put the rest in a spoiler mothers who abuse their children bc they were unplanned as they view them as a burden, mothers who abuse their children bc they are disabled, and view them as a burden and in the way of getting a "normal" life, same with fathers who didn't want their children and abuse them becuase, and parents who k*ll their children

So if a leader is put into that position because other people think they would be a good leader and not because they want the position, they don't - and they don't resent their subjects because of the burdern, that would be the best leader

A leader truly chosen by the people, not one that wants power, runs for a position, campaigns, and then is chosen, but purely chosen bc other people because of leadership qualities alone, and not because they are "an option". So politicians I don't ever think could be the best possible leader

Which is why some monarchs who didn't want the position or to be royalty but cared about their people, and tried to relate with and understand and listen to the common people have been fairer and "better" rulers than presidents, even though they were elected

NOT the monarchs who saw themselves as above their subjects because of being born into that position and being royalty

Ofc that being said, I am not at all advocating for monarchy or saying I want it, the system of birth determing who rules is unfair and ridiculous

There will never really be a perfect system

 

[Kataphract]

ultimately one can revert this question to the other question of is it nature versus nurture?

Was it traditional/prevalent societal tendencies or is it naturally hardcoded into biology?

 

[doll]

i mean, kind of
men are often more violent than women, and they are more susceptible to 'violent'/'frowned upon' mental illnessed such as anti-social pd and a substance abuse disorder
thats all i can really say bc i dont speak jimmeny cricket

 

[Pirioca]

Very "Lord of the Flies" which is about pre-pubescent boys as young as 6, so testerone and aggression is not at puberty and after levels, and not really relating to "men" but actual children.

There can be pre-pubescent killers too. Girls and boys.

5 Chilling Cases Of Kids Who Kill - AmongMen

Proof that not all children are innocent.

www.amongmen.com

Mary Bell was 10 and 11 when she strangled two boys. Jon Venables and Robert Thompson was 10, when they abducted and murdered a two year old boy. This are indeed rare cases, but they are not impossible.

 

[litc]

There could be pre-pubescent killers too.

5 Chilling Cases Of Kids Who Kill - AmongMen

Proof that not all children are innocent.

www.amongmen.com

Mary Bell was 10 when she strangled two boys. Jon Venables and Robert Thompson too, when they abducted and murdered a two year old boy. This are indeed rare cases, but they are not impossible.

I do know all about those pre pubescent killers (they generally killed much younger than them again because of the power and control and bad home life )
I had actually read about all 3 as well as other young killers before

I was just saying the lord of the flies boys acting that was was less about them being guys and the testosterone than general human nature as they were children

for sure, children aren’t pure hearted until puberty or anything

I get your point tho

I suppose I meant before puberty boys and girls are more comparable as a human nature thing rather than a “man” thing or “woman” thing